Evil Dead 4 confirmed (+ remake)

Discussion in 'General' started by Workshed, Feb 4, 2005.

  1. maybrick

    maybrick Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2001
    Messages:
    11,183
    Likes Received:
    891
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Keene, NH
    That's approximately 27% more men than women in attendance, if my math is serving me correctly (12 points being 27% of 44). It winds up being a relatively big difference.
     
  2. spawningblue

    spawningblue Deadite

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2004
    Messages:
    5,069
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
    I enjoyed this, 7.5/10 for me.

    It wasn't perfect but was a lot of gore soaked fun! Like the original film once it starts it doesn't really let up until the end, and most importantly it uses almost all practical effects! We should be applauding it for that alone in these times where just about everything is CG'd. Does it compare to the first film? No. Is it scary? Nope. Did anybody actually expect these? I hope not.

    The characters weren't the most interesting, but I don't get all the hate towards them. Go back and watch Evil Dead, the characters aren't that well developed either. There were plenty of plot holes but nothing that really took me out of the film or ruined it for me.

    As for the after credits ending, eah. It made me smile, that was it. Nothing to get excited about, nothing to complain about either. I don't think it really meant anything to be honest.

    Is it a game changer? No, but it's a pretty damn good remake, which is more then enough for me. It had some great and creative gore sequences, some of the best in a while, and kept me entertained throughout. What more could you ask?
     
  3. Anthropophagus

    Anthropophagus Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2004
    Messages:
    4,050
    Likes Received:
    390
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Canada
    I'll be seeing this later this week, unlike most my expectations were low since it was announced and the trailer did nothing to sway my initial feelings.
    I am looking forward to seeing it, but with mild expectations.
     
  4. NaturesMistake

    NaturesMistake Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2006
    Messages:
    500
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Saw this twice and LOVED it. Some of the gore was darkened a bit to get their rating however so it'll be nice to see an unrated cut. There are some edits that could have made it scarier but this film felt like Evil Dead. Dark humor and horror mixed extremely well.
     
  5. Demoni

    Demoni Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2010
    Messages:
    1,921
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    38
    American percentages must be very different than European.
     
  6. soxfan666

    soxfan666 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    1,150
    Likes Received:
    60
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    SW Florida
    Probably not, but it depends on how you look at the percentage. If 56% of the audience were male then 44% percent were female. This shows that there is 12 percentage points more males than females at the show. So yes, it is only 6% over 50/50, but for evil dead it was 56/44 males to females, a sizable chunk.
     
  7. maybrick

    maybrick Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2001
    Messages:
    11,183
    Likes Received:
    891
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Keene, NH
    Correct. To illustrate it further, if the ratio is 50/50 that means there is the same number of men vs. women, or 0% difference. If it's 40/60, it means that there are 20 more men than women out of 100. That is a difference of 20. 20 is half of 40, which means that there would be 50% more men than women. at 25/75 there is 300% more men than women, and so on and so on. So using that math a 12% difference out of a 100 translates to 27% more men than women. Get it now?
     
  8. mcchrist

    mcchrist A new breed of pervert!

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2001
    Messages:
    7,998
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Keepin' the dogs away...
    MorallySound, I am 1000% with you. That post credit sequence was a joke. It could have been filmed in the toilet at comic con. It was lazy, uninspired and stupid even by horror nerd standards, and the fact that people have tried to sell me the movie based on that sequence alone is pathetic.

    I can't believe that 5 seconds can be such a disgrace.

    The movie itself, I ate it right up. In spite of myself, I fell for it, and the last third of the film was full of genuine dread and tension, which is rare for me.

    But that sequence, man. That was the turd in the punchbowl, it almost ruined my night because my experience was great enough , I didn't want to have to bitch about it. Horror nerds and horror pandering have ruined the genre, and my thoughts were "and here we go."

    Good god.
     
  9. evildeadfan123

    evildeadfan123 Sam & Dean Winchester

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2004
    Messages:
    2,247
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Location:
    Missouri
    I agree. I saw it too. It was okay, and the 3D was not worth the extra cost. Hands down, Evil Dead is so much better than that.
     
  10. Shlockjock81

    Shlockjock81 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2008
    Messages:
    1,173
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Toronto, Canada
    Saw it yesterday. I'd give it a 7/10. Definitely the best of the remakes (excluding The Fly and The Thing, but that should be a given at this point).

    Gripes:
    - The intro was completely unnecessary and seemed like it was from a different film altogether.
    - Acting and dialogue was atrocious. Yes I'm aware it wasn't stellar in the original, but at least each '81 character had some definition. Here, Mia seemed to be the only standout.
    - For a 'fun film' I think it took itself a bit too seriously. Perfect example: David's GF coming to after she's been nail-gun'd and dismembered, saying "why does my face hurt??". It was teetering on torture porn there. Fuck off. Not in an Evil Dead film.
    - The trailer gave WAY too much away. I understand they wanted audiences to know that this wasn't simply a PG-13 affair, but still. The exacto-knife popsicle gag was a highlight of the film and the trailer ruined it.
    - The trailer sold me on the film when I heard Mia say "cut it... CUT IT!!!". I HATE that they changed her line in the film to "don't cut it!!!". David's GF was turned into a deadite regardless of her getting rid of her arm, and I'm sure evil-Mia knew this... so why would she panic at her severing her arm? I thought deadites LOVED blood and carnage. CUT IT, dammit!
    - The finale was spectacular but seriously... did Mia REALLY need to lose her hand? What purpose did that serve. Maybe it bothered me because it was handled so poorly. I'm sorry but if you lose a hand, you'd be in shock or, at the very least, SCREAMING in agony/passing out from blood loss. But nope. Not Mia. She still has the energy to chainsaw the villain in the face after delivering a snappy one-liner and then triumphantly stare into the sunrise.

    Yeah, as a seasoned horror fan I probably shouldn't be nitpicking so much. But I wanted to like this more than I did. It's a decent remake, but it's painfully inconsistent.
     
  11. deepred

    deepred Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2008
    Messages:
    837
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Atlanta
    I didn't like it. It wasn't fun or suspenseful. :(
     
  12. dave13

    dave13 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2008
    Messages:
    5,627
    Likes Received:
    878
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Toronto, Canada
    I hate to belabour a point, but i just don't understand why one word in one 5 second scene has people so upset? I honestly don't understand the significance that is being placed on that scene. Especially if you actually liked the movie! Are you reading something into it that I'm not seeing? Does it have some particular significance that escapes me? I was waiting to see what horrendous gore shot or twist or reveal was going to occur after the credits. When I saw what it actually was, how completely disposable and utterly silly it was, I couldn't help but chuckle. It's a joke, people! It's like Ferris coming out of the shower and telling the audience to "go home. It's over. Go!" Please, somebody explain this shit to me!
     
  13. Steel76

    Steel76 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2010
    Messages:
    2,364
    Likes Received:
    1,166
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Sweden
    I think people are just taking this WAY to seriously. It´s an inside joke for the fans of the original, and it´s placed AFTER the credits. How can that bring the entire movie down?

    Feels a bit like extreme nitpicking. :D
     
  14. spawningblue

    spawningblue Deadite

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2004
    Messages:
    5,069
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
    Yeah I don't get it either. It was pointless, but I don't get why people are upset about it. As far as I'm concerned it was just a fun throwaway for fans of the original. Most probably didn't even stay around to see it, so just pretend it wasn't there and move on.

    Agree.
     
  15. mcchrist

    mcchrist A new breed of pervert!

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2001
    Messages:
    7,998
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Keepin' the dogs away...
    When you have 20 odd people hyping up the end sequence like it was the coolest thing they had ever seen, it builds up a certain expectation. Yeah, five seconds is a major shit.
     
  16. Steel76

    Steel76 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2010
    Messages:
    2,364
    Likes Received:
    1,166
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Sweden
    Well, that´s not the movies fault, it those damn people for hyping the sequence ;)
     
  17. Workshed

    Workshed A Barge Person

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2004
    Messages:
    10,003
    Likes Received:
    1,717
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    CA
    "Five seconds and one word of dialogue in an after-credits sequence almost ruined my night."

    :eek2:
     
  18. CPT HOOK

    CPT HOOK Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2008
    Messages:
    7,633
    Likes Received:
    2,483
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    US
    I thought the Bruce Campbell cameo was harmless. The movie had much bigger problems.

    I think it basically falls into the typical "haunted house" rut that most modern ghost movies fall into. Look at Haunting In Connecticut, Boogeyman, The Messengers, etc. They're just random scares with no cohesion. It's boring. Movies like Paranormal Activity or Insidious worked because they escalate. Same goes for the original Evil Dead.

    I'm not going to tell you that the original Evil Dead was grounded in reality, or that the scares entirely make sense. But compared to this remake, I found it extremely grounded. For instance, take the tree-rape. In this film, the girl sees a doppelganger of herself, who pukes up a giant black worm. Completely random, and way too far removed from reality to be even remotely scary.

    Even though being raped by a tree is definitely far-fetched, if you were walking alone through the woods at night and there were tree branches stretching across the path in front of you, your mind might toy with the idea that they could reach out like an arm and grab you. In those regards, the scene in the original is grounded. But if you were walking through the woods at night, I doubt anyone is thinking, "gee, I hope a doppelganger doesn't show up and puke a black raping worm at me."

    The original Evil Dead also had an advantage where you don't know what the evil is, so you can get away with a little randomness. Here, they come out the gates with somewhat of an explanation. So it doesn't really have an excuse as to why it's all over the place.

    I just didn't find it to be any fun, or even remotely scary. Like I mentioned before, it pretty much falls into suit with the rest of Raimi's post-2000 Ghost House fare like Boogeyman, The Grudge, The Messengers, etc. The only difference is that this one has gore.
     
  19. spawningblue

    spawningblue Deadite

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2004
    Messages:
    5,069
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
    I agree, I didn't like the dopplegangers/ Grudge looking demons. The demons were very generic looking and I missed their white eyes. That was probably the biggest loss from the original in my opinion. They were more of a homage to every other modern film instead of the Evil Dead films.

    As for not being as good as the original, I knew from the beginning it wouldn't, so that didn't bother me too much. As a remake and a modern day horror film, I thought it was one of the better ones and I had a lot of fun.
     
    Last edited: Apr 10, 2013
  20. Demoni

    Demoni Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2010
    Messages:
    1,921
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    38
    They edited the line in the trailer, not the film.

    Aaaahhh, the powers of editing, what once was, after all, isn´t.
     

Share This Page